<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title><![CDATA[Comments for entry "I'm a What?" at Dilbert.com Blog]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/591]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Regular thoughts and updates from Dilbert.com]]></description>
<language><![CDATA[en-us]]></language>
<generator><![CDATA[VPI.Net MyBlogAbout]]></generator>
<managingEditor><![CDATA[]]></managingEditor>
<webMaster><![CDATA[]]></webMaster>
<ttl><![CDATA[5]]></ttl>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from Hekateras]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/103568]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[&quot;You just disagree with my point because you lack reading comprehension and can't understand it&quot; and &quot;It was all a social experiment!&quot; are both very cheap and intellectually dishonest ways to attempt to win a debate, and any amount of experience communicating with people above ten years of age should tell you that it's ridiculous to expect your audience and/or your critics to take them at face value.

And even IF you meant what you said about this being a social experiment, it still broadcasts the message that it's totally okay for you to treat a serious social issue as fodder for a theoretical experiment, just for kicks. Very much still condescending and insensitive.

Of course, you're probably about to claim that THIS is ALSO part of your social experiment, on an even more meta level. Yeah.

Also: Thank you for your original post and for promoting the viewpoint that men are from Mars, women are from Venus, they can't ever learn to understand each other and shouldn't bother trying, and the best way to deal with it is to tune out arguments for the strategic purpose of getting laid later. I'm sure that sort of attitude is exactly what we need, and was enlightening - as well as flattering and reasuring, as it gives us an excuse for our lack of effort at decent communication - for men and women alike. You made my day.

Disclaimer: I'm not actually addressing or making a statement about the issue. I just want to do a social experiment on how people react to sarcasm.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[ThuAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/103568]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from girl101]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/102695]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[So, I made an account just so I could reply to this post. Yes, I am a girl, yes I consider myself a feminist, and yes, I agree with a majority of what was written. You can't really define who makes more money because that depends on what job you are doing. Waiting tables, for example, most female servers make more than their male counterparts, and  those statistics are never going to be accurate because no one who works in a job that relies on tips claims as much as they make. 

Second, allow me to explain my concept of feminism, I believe that women should not be oppressed (This isn't really happening that much in the USA) and I think women should be allowed to do anything men can if capable. For example, I can fix just about anything that's broken and and am a pretty good marksman but I don't know !$%* about cars, so I'm probably not going to change my own oil. This doesn't make me an oppressed woman anymore than the fact that my husband cooks most of the meals makes him less of a man (it's more a thing about wanting something other than mac and cheese or pizza that isn't terrible). Everyone has skills and limitations, when did being a FEMINIst lose it's feminist touch? Think about what women are going through in some parts of the world, start !$%*!$%* to help them instead of finding something like this and try to prove you have bigger balls than an actual man.

I'll take my free drinks at the bar, and multiple orgasms and you guys can keep your higher paying jobs and ability to pee standing up.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[ThuPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/102695]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from TacoTard]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/95066]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[
Avoid Zealots, they are generally humorless.
Never has this been proven more right than now.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[ThuPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/95066]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from Crazybear]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/90344]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Feminists and Mens Rights !$%*!$% will also both be offended by this:

www.thedailycramp.com

The Crazy Bear rules!]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[FriPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/90344]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from OneMist8k]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/90282]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I love it.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[FriPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/90282]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from j_l_Larson]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/88039]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I just realized who Alice is... she's the reincarnation of Lucy from Peanuts!  Lucy thought everyone was a blockhead and frequently ends arguments with her fist.  Incredible.  I wonder if anyone else ever noticed the similarity.  Now we just need to see Alice mooning over a reclusive genius artist who doesn't return her affections ...]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/88039]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from wompum]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/87905]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[&quot;achristie
-11 Rank Up Rank Down
Mar 30, 2011
I tried posting a comment on that Feministe site but apparently the moderator didn't approve:&quot;

Ain't that the truth, those sites show how little actual discussion is allowed in those places, there is a dogma, and they have to stick to it, and so the comments are all effectively cheerleaders for the article, the commenters that tow the party line gets promoted, and they promote their own kind in turn, in a way, they operate like partisan hacks would, no different from say a rush limbaugh type forum.

But yea it is the truth, the problem with many feminists these days is that they do not really care about the principle of fairness, which is why spurious reasoning is so readily accepted, whether it be the made up numbers, massively inflated much of the time, or simple apple to orange comparisons.  The more closely you look at any issue, say the 80 cents on the dollar bit, the more factors you take into account, the more those differences go away, we've known this for a long time, but the agenda groups stick to the old lie, because it is convenient, and because they have sold their soul in the name of their cause. When standards slip because anything is justified to further your cause, it gets ugly.

It has become such a mine field now, 9 out of 10 prisoners is male.  This is accepted, but as scott said, if the numbers were flipped around there would be no end to the screaming. But there is silence, why?  It reveals an inconvenient fact about gender difference, that men suffer as well, and while they might succeed more, they also fail a whole lot more as well.  And acknowledging that difference is detrimental to the simplistic narrative the agenda groups rely on when trying to push quotas and other special treatment.  I'd have more faith in womens groups if they pushed as hard for girls to become auto mechanics, garbage men and plumbers as they did for the &quot;board room&quot;.  The discrepancies are there in both cases, but you can guess which jobs they are not bothering to fight for!]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/87905]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from quarkwright]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/87706]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I liked your perspective on fairness, although I had not really considered it from a male vs female perspective before.  
I think it was one of the !$%*!$%*!$ of becoming an adult when I finally realized that fairness was an illusion, although nevertheless a goal still worth aiming for.  
Every child has uttered the cry &quot;That's not fair!&quot; and vowed to change the source of the unfairness if such power is ever granted to them.  Obviously I was no exception, and growing up in a family of 7 children, I witnessed many perceived instances of unfairness, and vowed to right the wrongs in my own parenting later on.
Child number one arrived, and fairness was easy.  Child number two followed eventually, and suddenly I realized the error in my thinking.  
Child number one had my undivided attention for the first 3 years of his life.  It was impossible by all laws of the universe to provide the same to child number two.  Child 1 suddenly faced a much limited attention share, compared to child 2.  Was this more fair to child 2 (who received a great deal more attention) or child 1 (who still overall received more than child 1 would ever attain)?  
Even in the simplest of tasks of fairness I was defeated.  Buy the 2 children identical toys.  Sooner or later, one was broken or lost.  Now prove who really owns the undamaged toy.  Or deprive the other child of the undamaged one, when he did nothing wrong??  
Solve this by buying one red and one blue toy, otherwise the same.  A basic law of the universe (I believe Murphy was the first to define it) states that both children will prefer the red one, and scorn the blue one.  How to solve that 'fairly'??
I believe that the only way to 'win' (defined in the loosest sense) is to try and balance for each individual that the number of good (i.e. unfair in my favor) times with the number of bad (i.e. unfair in the other guy's favor).  Of course, for me, that means I get to hear the cry of &quot;It's not fair!!&quot; an equal number of times for both children.  Which probably balances karmically somehow with the number of times my own parents heard it from me.  Blech!]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[MonPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/87706]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from Cubicle101]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/87642]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Scott,

From one comics artist/writer to another (Cubicle101.com) I'm in complete agreement on everything you said. In fact not long ago I posted a comic strip to address the people who are pissing and moaning about a subject very similar to this one. It's regarding the use of words and how people will go out of their way to be offended about something that really doesn't matter to begin with.

(Link: http://cubicle101.com/cubicle101/?page_id=1450) NSFW language/topic

So, short and sweet I know exactly where you're coming and I'm right there with ya.
Stay Tooned!!!]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[MonAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/87642]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from Soapie0]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86888]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[As a writer, I understand the point about not wanting your words shared once the meaning is distorted. 

As a woman, I like being treated better than men.  I like not having to worry about being drafted.  I like having doors opened for me and being served first (yes, waiters, I notice if you don't), I like having men open jars and carry heavy boxes for me.  There are reasons why men and women are made differently and I would be missing out if I didn't appreciate and enjoy the perks of being a woman.

I understood the points of the post and it didn't bother me.  I didn't think it was particulary humorous, but it wasn't offensive.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[ThuAMCDTE_Rstst]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86888]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from thisisantiproductiv]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86848]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[First time on here.  I've been a long-time reader of Dilbert, Scott.  I admit that when I first saw the original blog earlier today I said to myself &quot;wait, what?&quot; So I did what the dying-breed of normal human beings do, and I read it again.  Actually, what I did was find it, and read it in it's entirety, as that wasn't what was the website I saw it on had given me.

Want to know what the real issue is that plagues us all daily is, Scott?  

It's reading.  In a world filled with youtube, &quot;lol's&quot; and &quot;ttyl's,&quot; most people just really don't bother to devote time to reading anymore.  When I say reading, I mean the whole gamut; not just seeing the words, but being able to comprehend their meaning when assembled a certain way at the same time.  I had this realization a while ago, and yesterday (before even seeing this nonsense), I had it again, only this time with numbers.  A gentleman at a store that I don't frequent refused to sell me some beer.  When I asked why, he wouldn't give me my drivers license and went for his phone.  He informed me that he was going to phone the police, because minors aren't supposed to be purchasing alcohol.  If I had time to kill, I would have waited there for an officer to show up and arrest me for being born in 1982, as opposed to the 1992 that he seemed to have read on my drivers license, but I just simply wanted to get the beer and go home.  Path of least resistance, basically.  

That moment, and many other moments just like it, have single-handedly killed any aspirations I have had in my life to be a writer.  It's painful to know that anything you say will be quickly broken down, all which is relevant to your point will be eradicated, and idiots will fixate on the wrong parts of the message.  Even in some of these comments, on this very post, you can tell that some people joined just to call you an !$%*!$%* and didn't bother attempting to even learn what the hell was going on.  It's no wonder there are only pictures and no words in assembly instructions for things like cheap drug store furniture like tv stands and bookshelves anymore.  What's amazing is that you can still buy bookshelves.  What for, I have no idea.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86848]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from Perplexed]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86838]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I have a fairly high reading comprehension level. Still, I'm perplexed. Was the Men's Rights piece meant to be satiric in the manner of Jonathan Swift's Modest Proposal? If so, I'd say it just didn't work. I know that taking statements out of context is often misleading. Lawyers like me do that to one another a lot. It's not considered good form but the bad lawyers do it and if the Judge isn't paying much attention (modestly, about 75% of the time) they slip a little more injustice into the system than people should be able to expect. If the Judge is paying attention, the Judge usually chastises the lawyer for trying to make a fool of the Judge for missing what the ellipsis elided. Here, however, the context didn't help me understand what the heck the writer was trying to say. Nor did I find the explanation of what the writer was trying to say written after the post was posted unposted and reposted. Biggest problem. Post not funny.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86838]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from achristie]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86836]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I tried posting a comment on that Feministe site but apparently the moderator didn't approve:

&quot;After reading these posts, it's no wonder men always just say,
&quot;Yes dear.&quot; 
It's so much easier, which is the point of Adams' blog.

If a woman really has a problem that needs resolution, try to explain it concisely to a man in less than 30 words. Bullet points are a plus.&quot;]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86836]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from seth75]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86821]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I never read blogs. Until today I considered blogging to be an egotistical act perpetrated by an overly selfish person. &quot;HEY LOOK AT ME!! LOOK AT ME!&quot; 

That has all changed. Scott, you are funny. I get you. Thanks to 'Men's Rights' and its associated fallout, you have a new fan.

Thank you and keep writing. (I'll get a dictionary)]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86821]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from DrowsyKitten]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86734]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I went through the entire inane and tedious registration process just to respond to the OP regarding the men's rights thing.

IM(female)O, the whole post was pretty well done.  

The entire topic can be boiled down into one simple concept, &quot;The squeakiest wheel gets the grease.&quot;

If guys want preferential treatment then clearly they need to learn how to !$%*! and moan louder and better than females.  Men are apparently not willing to do the hard work necessary to become so obnoxious that society will give you anything so long as you shut up.  In so long as men &quot;don't care&quot; about 90% of the things going on around them, they cannot be expected to be taken seriously as a minority of any sort.  

As such, I think it would be wise for men to get together and draft a charter that clearly focuses on strategies to improve their commitment to the art of complaining loudly.  Once this document has been created and signed by appropriately impressive male figureheads then it should be submitted to the board for approval.  If you men don't take this whole thing seriously, then why should we?

BTW I LOVE the word !$%*!$%*! in the context of the OP.  And also, I don &quot;get&quot; the whole talking dog thing.....]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86734]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from wahlah]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86731]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Dear Scott: One of my favorite feminists (and there are many) posted something on FB about this whole mess. However, you have won me over. Dangerously thin ice you've been skirting, given the diversity of venues - but brave and true, I believe you are. 
Of course: Fail me, and die. (jk)
]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86731]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from yodisco]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86726]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Been reading the Comic for years and now this seems like the perfect first and only blog to follow.  Rolling on my ass at every word.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86726]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from ObvUsername]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86723]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Saw a post on EW and I registered specifically so I could provide a vote of support.  Anyone who reads this post and thinks you're a misogynist is simply being combative.  I also agree that &quot;Men's Rights&quot; activists are kind of corny - the right way to approach the problem is by promoting *equal* rights.  Equal rights gets the same job done, appeals to woman as well, and doesn't leave men sounding like a bunch of crybabies. 
]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86723]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from ninestraycats]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86722]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[[repost to get rid of all those filters--would've preferred to edit but alas]

Scott, I am writing regarding your one-sentence summary of your views, not the sexism charges.

I'm pretty sure Frederick Douglas' biography is direct proof that emotional charge doesn't ruin your ability to rationally discuss. His clarity &amp; poignancy are otherworldly. 

And even if you think that the vast majority of people can't overcome their emotional investment arising from being date raped and not believed by the cops, having someone yell [n-word] at you just for laughs, reading about a Mexican kid being shot and killed for throwing rocks over the border and hundreds of Yahoo commenters agreeing that it wasn't an overreaction, even if you believe that level of overcoming isn't possible for the vast majority of people, you should at least agree that we have to try and engage discussion anyways, lest these emotionally charging events continue indefinitely. If you admit that some people deal with crap that enrages them to the point of irrationality, yet refuse discussion, at least come up with another solution for ending that crap. But this is all moot! Have you truly never met an emotionally charged person who can argue logically? Have you truly met so few that you believe they are exceptions to an overarching rule?]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86722]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from shmegger]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86716]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I get it.

Good Luck with everyone else...]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/86716]]></guid>
</item>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCSTE_Rstst]]></pubDate>
<lastBuildDate><![CDATA[WedPMCSTE_Rstst]]></lastBuildDate></channel></rss>
